Quote:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/report-aca-plans-have-a-third-fewer-providers-than-employer-based-plans/2015/07/15/6ee8ebf2-2b08-11e5-a250-42bd812efc09_story.html

Report: ACA plans have a third fewer providers than employer-based plans

Consumers who bought insurance on the health exchanges last year had access to one-third fewer doctors and hospitals, on average, than people with traditional employer-provided coverage, according to an analysis released Wednesday.

The study by consulting firm Avalere Health provides a statistical basis for anecdotal reports from consumers and others about the more limited doctor and hospital choices in plans offered on marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act.

In these “narrow networks,” health plans negotiate contracts with a select number of providers who agree to be reimbursed at lower rates. That means the insurers can set their premiums lower, at least theoretically. But, depending on the plan’s design, consumers typically pay more, and sometimes much more, if they use a doctor or hospital outside the network.

Compared with traditional employer coverage, exchange plans had networks with 42 percent fewer cancer and cardiac specialists; 32 percent fewer mental health and primary-care doctors, and 24 percent fewer hospitals, the Avalere analysis found.

See image of details on % of providers at this link or the article link, it's too big to show in this thread:
https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/07/15/Health-Environment-Science/Graphics/w_promo_Innetwork2300.jpg?uuid=v9MyLCskEeWWDyLEupgu1A

[...] A poll last year by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that the people most likely to buy coverage on the insurance marketplaces were more willing than the public at large and people with employment-based coverage to accept a narrower network of doctors and hospitals in exchange for lower costs. In general, older people and those with higher incomes prefer broad networks, even if they cost more, while younger people and those with lower incomes are more evenly divided. [...]

LTC8K6

Jul 17 2015, 07:09 AM

http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/071615-762113-obamacare-mandate-penalty-is-raising-far-less-than-expected.htm

ObamaCare's Mandate Penalty Tax Brings In 40% Less Than Expected

Quote:

 

The IRS reported this week that 6.6 million people paid the ObamaCare mandate penalty for not having insurance last year, which the administration says is 10% higher than they'd expected.

This isn't exactly good news, given that the entire point of the mandate penalty tax is to encourage everyone to buy coverage.

Even if it were, the number comes with two big caveats.

First, 250,000 of those people didn't owe the penalty at all because they qualified for one of ObamaCare's many exemptions. Another 50,000-plus paid too big a penalty. All told, these overpayments added up to $35 million, the IRS says.

The second big caveat is the fact that, whatever the administration says about the number of people paying the penalty, the actual money raised by the tax is far lower than had been predicted.

Assuming the IRS pays those 300,000 people back, the tax will have raised just over $1.2 billion this year.

That's well below the $2 billion that the Congressional Budget Office had projected just this March — 40% below forecast, as a matter of fact.

The IRS says the revenue numbers aren't final and could change. Even so, they're not likely to get anywhere near the CBO's initial forecast, which was made when the law passed in 2010 and which claimed that ObamaCare would cut the deficit in its first 10 years. Back then, the CBO expected the penalty to raise $9 billion in 2015.

This shortfall, combined with the fact that other ObamaCare taxes aren't raising nearly as much as predicted, puts ObamaCare's finances in even deeper trouble

Quote:

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/california-may-let-undocumented-immigrants-buy-obamacare-120249.html

California may let undocumented immigrants buy Obamacare

California lawmakers and activists are spearheading a first-in-the-nation plan to let undocumented immigrants buy Obamacare health insurance.

Supporters say the California proposal, which would need federal approval and couldn’t start until 2017, is the next logical step in expanding health insurance to a population that was intentionally excluded from the president’s health-care law. But uniting the two highly combustible issues of Obamacare and immigration could reignite a fierce health-care reform controversy.

[...]

The issue is already making its way into 2016 presidential politics. Democratic presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley, a former Maryland governor, this week proposed an immigration reform plan that would provide health care, including Obamacare subsidies, to some undocumented immigrants.

Yet the effort in California, home to roughly 2.5 million undocumented immigrants, could turn out to be largely symbolic. Undocumented immigrants can already buy private health plans not sold through the Obamacare exchanges, and those who have already struggled to afford insurance probably wouldn’t find it easier to buy exchange plans since they wouldn’t be allowed to receive federal subsidies. On average, those subsidies reduce the monthly premium by nearly 75 percent.

[...]

“Not allowing certain types of immigrants to pay into the exchange of the ACA is coming back to haunt us fiscally,” California Senate President pro Tempore Kevin de León said, referring to the Affordable Care Act.

[...]

• https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/26/remarks-president-affordable-care-act
  
  Remarks by the President on the Affordable Care Act
  Prince George’s Community College - Largo, Maryland
  September 26, 2013
  
  ...Now you've got new competition, because insurers want your business. And that means you will have cheaper prices.
  
  ...Competition, choice, transparency -- all these things are keeping costs down.
  
  ...The result is more choice, more competition, real health care security.
  
  ...the prices came in lower than we expected -- lower than I predicted. That’s how well competition and choice work.
  
  ...Here is a prediction for you: A few years from now ... everybody is feeling pretty good about all the ... competition

Quote:

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-aetna-rate-hike-20150716-story.html

Aetna's 21% rate hike amounts to 'price gouging,' California regulator says

California's managed-care regulator slammed health insurance giant Aetna Inc. on Thursday for "price gouging" after it raised rates on small employers by 21%.

This marked the fourth time since 2013 that California officials have found Aetna's premium increases on small businesses unreasonable.

[...]

Aetna just announced a $37-billion acquisition of rival Humana Inc.

That deal is part of an industrywide consolidation wave that has prompted concerns that reduced competition will further drive up rates for consumers and employers.

Anthem Inc., the nation's second-largest health insurer, has been in negotiations to buy Cigna Corp., and Woodland Hills insurer Health Net Inc. agreed to be acquired this month by Centene Corp. for $6.8 billion.

Rouillard said she worries that mergers will reward investors at the expense of consumers.

[...]

LTC8K6

Jul 17 2015, 01:28 PM

So what happens as the rock meets the hard place?

Insurers need to raise rates, but are not allowed to do so.

LTC8K6

Jul 18 2015, 11:23 PM

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article27550147.html

Health plan tax bill introduced in California special session